Peak Wind

[westwall]

The amount of wind being installed every year in the US is compounding by the double digits every year. And we have the potential to keep that up for quite a few years.

Wind Powering America: U.S. Installed Wind Capacity and Wind Project Locations

That site shows the installed capacity by the state each year from 1999 to present

Yes, so long as the government is willing to subsidize their endeavors on the backs of the American taxpayer there are plenty of shysters who are willing to take the money. Doesn't mean it's a smart, ethical, or proper thing to do though.

 

[mdn2000]

Vesta from Denmark is being touted as a success, yet Vesta went bankrupt and was saved by the United States of America, through subsidies given to Green Energy, through tax breaks, and the most hideous way of all, by California and Oregon passing laws mandating the use of Vesta's turbines.

So all Citizens of the USA are increasing the debt the US government must repay, that is all Citizens are now taking money from our own pockets and making people of Denmark rich.

All Citizens of the USA are seeing electric rates rise while Denmark enjoys profits only achievable through the tyranny of government, the USA government mandating the Citizens will pay higher prices for electricity and will pay higher taxes to make foreign companies rich beyond their means.

A failed technology being propped up with billions of taxpayer money, USA's taxpayer money.

Vesta is an old company, over a hundred years making wind mills, no other industry in the world has received so much help in the way of free research, grants, subsidies, tax breaks, bankruptcy protection and Law mandating its use, and its still failing, still bankrupting companies, and now countries such as Spain.

 

[Old Rocks]

Vestas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History
Vestas was founded in 1945 by Peder Hansen as "Vestjysk Stålteknik A/S" (West-Jutlandish steel technology). The company initially manufactured household appliances, moving its focus to agricultural equipment in 1950, intercoolers in 1956, and hydraulic cranes in 1968. It entered the wind turbine industry in 1979.[9]

In 2003, the company merged with the Danish wind turbine manufacturer NEG Micon to create the largest wind turbine manufacturer in the world, under the banner of Vestas Wind Systems. After an operational loss in 2005, Vestas recovered in 2006, and continues to have 28% market share.[2]

In February 2009, the company announced the production of two new turbine types, the 3-megawatt V112 and 1.8-megawatt V100. The new models will be available in 2010.[10]

 

[westwall]

Vestas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

History
Vestas was founded in 1945 by Peder Hansen as "Vestjysk Stålteknik A/S" (West-Jutlandish steel technology). The company initially manufactured household appliances, moving its focus to agricultural equipment in 1950, intercoolers in 1956, and hydraulic cranes in 1968. It entered the wind turbine industry in 1979.[9]

In 2003, the company merged with the Danish wind turbine manufacturer NEG Micon to create the largest wind turbine manufacturer in the world, under the banner of Vestas Wind Systems. After an operational loss in 2005, Vestas recovered in 2006, and continues to have 28% market share.[2]

In February 2009, the company announced the production of two new turbine types, the 3-megawatt V112 and 1.8-megawatt V100. The new models will be available in 2010.[10]

The company was founded in 1898 as a family run blacksmithy. We've warned you repeatedly about reliance on wiki!


Vestas | Wind. It means the world to us. | History

 

[Old Rocks]

A blacksmith shop in a small farming town is not a company. The modern manufacturing company was founded after 1945.

 

[TheTraveller]

Energy source Costs of electricity production €/MWh Costs of electricity production €ct/kWh
Nuclear Energy 107.0 – 124.0 10.70 – 12.40
Brown Coal 88.0 – 97.0 8.80 – 9.70
Black Coal 104.0 – 107.0 10.40 – 10.70
Domestic Gas 106.0 – 118.0 10.60 – 11.80
Wind Energy Onshore 49.7 – 96.1 4.97 – 9.61
Wind Energy Offshore 35.0 – 150.0 3.50 – 15.00
Hydropower 34.7 – 126.7 3.47 – 12.67
Biomass 77.1 – 115.5 7.71 – 11.55
Solar Electricity 284.3 – 391.4 28.43 – 39.14

Is this for real? I was utterly dismissive of wind until I saw this. But why don't businesses consider throwing windmills on top of tall buildings, instead of solar panels, if solar panels are only around a sixth as efficient?

 

[westwall]

Energy source Costs of electricity production €/MWh Costs of electricity production €ct/kWh
Nuclear Energy 107.0 – 124.0 10.70 – 12.40
Brown Coal 88.0 – 97.0 8.80 – 9.70
Black Coal 104.0 – 107.0 10.40 – 10.70
Domestic Gas 106.0 – 118.0 10.60 – 11.80
Wind Energy Onshore 49.7 – 96.1 4.97 – 9.61
Wind Energy Offshore 35.0 – 150.0 3.50 – 15.00
Hydropower 34.7 – 126.7 3.47 – 12.67
Biomass 77.1 – 115.5 7.71 – 11.55
Solar Electricity 284.3 – 391.4 28.43 – 39.14

Is this for real? I was utterly dismissive of wind until I saw this. But why don't businesses consider throwing windmills on top of tall buildings, instead of solar panels, if solar panels are only around a sixth as efficient?

No, the wind numbers are the absolute optimal amount. They actually are only operating at full effect for less than 1/3 of the time.

 

[TheTraveller]

That's still better than solar - especially considering that the sun doesn't always shine on a solar panel, either. Although photovoltaics have been steadily improving for decades, they clearly have a long way to go before they reach competetive efficiencies!

 

[westwall]

That's still better than solar - especially considering that the sun doesn't always shine on a solar panel, either. Although photovoltaics have been steadily improving for decades, they clearly have a long way to go before they reach competetive efficiencies!

The big advantage solar has is in maintenance costs. A big wind turbine will cost you around 30,000 dollars a year in maintenance. Personal solar systems on the other hand are a few bucks to keep the panels clean. The big industrial solar plants are however even worse maintenance wise.

 

[TheTraveller]

Really? But isn't it also true that windmills last longer than solar panels?

 

[mdn2000]

Windmills last about 20 years, half as long as a nuclear power plant, imagine all the garbage, the worlds largest electric power plant in size, with the lowest output by a factor of 1:1000, and its all garbage. Then we rebuild another wind farm, again the worlds largest amount of raw materials, that is how we save ourselves from oil, using more oil to create less by the way of wind turbines.

 

[Old Rocks]

A life span of twenty years for a wind turbine means that after twenty years, you use a crane to pick the turbine off of the tower, put a new one on, and send the old one in for a rebuild. Much simpler than handling the radioactive contamination in the rebuild of a nuclear plant.

 

[Old Rocks]

Energy source Costs of electricity production €/MWh Costs of electricity production €ct/kWh
Nuclear Energy 107.0 – 124.0 10.70 – 12.40
Brown Coal 88.0 – 97.0 8.80 – 9.70
Black Coal 104.0 – 107.0 10.40 – 10.70
Domestic Gas 106.0 – 118.0 10.60 – 11.80
Wind Energy Onshore 49.7 – 96.1 4.97 – 9.61
Wind Energy Offshore 35.0 – 150.0 3.50 – 15.00
Hydropower 34.7 – 126.7 3.47 – 12.67
Biomass 77.1 – 115.5 7.71 – 11.55
Solar Electricity 284.3 – 391.4 28.43 – 39.14

Is this for real? I was utterly dismissive of wind until I saw this. But why don't businesses consider throwing windmills on top of tall buildings, instead of solar panels, if solar panels are only around a sixth as efficient?

This is being actively worked on by many commercial firms. Here is one of them.

Vertical Axis Wind Turbines - Manufacturers

 

[Old Rocks]

That's still better than solar - especially considering that the sun doesn't always shine on a solar panel, either. Although photovoltaics have been steadily improving for decades, they clearly have a long way to go before they reach competetive efficiencies!

Yes, no, and in between. Thin film panels have reached the point that they can be manufactured for less than a dollar a watt. Mounted on existing building, such as warehouses, and big box stores, these could handle a significant portion of the daytime electrical load. At present, with present efficiencies, siting them where the grid has to built to the site, not good enough yet. But there are a number of companies achieving efficiencies above 40% in the lab. When they can do that at one dollar or less a watt, solar will have come of age.

 

[mdn2000]

Wind is a poor source of energy, further, the design of Wind Turbines is bad, its a giant experiment rushed to market to fill demand created by Government funding, government research, government subsidies.

Bearing failure caused by poor design, I should of guessed. How many of these monsters need to be repaired, all of them. 100% retrofit to protect human life, imagine that 30 ton turbine crashing to the ground during bearing failure.

What is the cost, its not counted, it does not matter, we can ignore the cost. Nice way to make electricity, hidden costs not discussed.

Preventing Bearing Failure: Third Time Lucky at Oregon Wind Farm | Renewable Energy World Magazine Article

London, UK [Renewable Energy World Magazine] Despite headline-making growth figures, the wind industry is still a relatively young one and as such, optimization of the technology continues. Indeed, it has been argued that some wind turbines have been pressed into production prematurely and have suffered from design-related failures within their first few years of operation as a result. The full cost of these failures, though often hidden by manufacturers’ warranties, can be extremely high as, in addition to expensive repair costs, owners of such facilities lose revenue every second of downtim

 

[mdn2000]

What about human life, what do you say when an industry that only exists because of environmentalist and government kills a man.

Parents of technician killed in Oregon wind-turbine collapse file suit Save Our SeaShore

20
FEB/10
0
February 06, 2010, 3:10PM

The parents of a 34-year-old technician who died when the 230-foot wind-turbine tower he was in collapsed to the ground in a Sherman County wheat field is suing for $7 million.

In their lawsuit, Gail Eikanas and Jerry Mitchell fault the Danish turbine maker Siemens Wind Power A/S, the Klondike Wind Farms III and ownersPPM Energy, among others. Their son, Chadd Mitchell, died in August 2007. He was the father of two.

The suit was filed Thursday in Multnomah County Circuit Court. According to the suit, the wind turbine's rotor went into "overspeed," causing the structure to crash to the ground and crush Mitchell.

In early 2008, the Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division fined Siemens Power Generation $10,500 for safety violations, after a six-month investigation.

The agency found that Siemens didn't properly train or supervise the employees on the job, and that Mitchell and another worker had less than two months of experience and were working without a supervisor. Siemens disagreed with the findings of safety violations, and appealed the findings. It's not clear what the outcome of that appeal was.

 

[mdn2000]

And if that is not to convince you how about a new fraud we will all pay the price for.

How come we never hear any of this, only that Wind Farms last forever, they are renewable and clean, how clean do you think manufacture of a transformer is.

Funny, I never here of Nuclear power plants with this problem and Nuclear power plants produce 10,000x's the power.

There is no such thing as a "Green Energy" industry, the only thing green is the name, Wind Turbine manufacture waste natural resources, you use more to create less power. Bad formula.

Why do wind turbine transformers fail so often? : Wind power design, wind turbine construction, renewable energy news | Windpower Engineering

Why do wind turbine transformers fail so often?
June 9, 2010 by KRemington
Filed under Wind Power News
_
2 Comments
Tom Steeber, Vice President, Pacific Crest Transformers, Medford, Oregon, pacificcresttrans.com
Using conventional off-the-shelf distribution transformers to cut costs is downright foolish. The unusual duty cycle of wind energy calls for an updated design.
A rush to install wind turbines has outstripped the usual developmental learning curve, one in which new technologies mature by trial and error, and define equipment that is well suited for the job at hand. In this 21st century land rush to cash-in on wind energy, developers are often trading low initial costs for higher total costs of ownership which is eventually shouldered by wind farm owners and operators. Nowhere is this more evident than with wind-turbine generator (WTG) step-up transformers.

The WTSU model step-up transformer from Pacific Crest Transformers, intended for duty on wind farms, features round coils, a cruciform, mitered core with heavy-duty clamping and a proprietary pressure-plate design, as well as a premium no-load tap changer. Coil-end blocking with heavy duty 3 gauge steel bracing and proprietary pressure plates contains axial forces exerted during a fault condition. These forces can cause telescoping of the coils, shortening transformer life. A cooling system shortens the path that heat generated within core and coils must take to reach the cooling fluid.
These devices take the approximately 460 V from the generator and step it up to about 34.5 kV. Then a collector on the wind farm further steps the synchronized power from a group of turbines to that of the grid, often 138 kV or more.
Historically the WTG transformer function has been handled by conventional, off-the-shelf distribution transformers. But a relatively large number of recent failures has convinced many that WTG transformer designs must be substantially more durable.
In fact, using conventional off-the-shelf distribution transformers as a low cost solution is folly. Some site operators keep spare transformers at their wind farms to fix the frequent outages caused by standard distribution transformers used where they do not belong. That is a waste of capit